Sept. 22, 2012 Dear Gangjeong Villagers, Our brief visit with you renew our faith that the people of Earth can learn to live in peace, that we can respect the beauty of all Earth’s creatures, our dependence upon them, and their right to flourish. We cannot thank you enough for your courage, determination, generosity, and uplifting expressions of joy, perhaps led by Mi-Kyoung, would ass this scarf to the ones on the Great Tree, and say a prayer to the four winds for your village and for ours, for the children of Earth and for Earth itself. In love. Joan and Ron
Ron and Joan Engel is a couple member of the Center for Human and Nature (CHN), a member group of the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature), who have often visited the Gangjeong village during the period of the 2012 WCC (World Conservation Congress) Jeju, Sept. 6 to 15 and passionately supported the Gangjeong villagers’ struggle against the Jeju naval base. Ron Engel, a respected lawyer from many members of the IUCN has made a touching speech on why the CHN has initiated a Motion 181: Protection of the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village on the last day of the WCC. Please see here.
About three weeks ago, we have received a grateful gift from them. The content was to ask us to let Ms. Kang Mi-Kyung and villagers to specially hang a scarf that Joan has enclosed on a more than 1,000 years sacred tree (a giant Elaeocarpus sylvestris var. ellipticus, probably the 2nd oldest tree in Korea) in the Netgiriso shrine and pray for the peace of the village and world. The above are the cards, writings and photos what they sent.
On Oct. 13, last Saturday, though we could not have chance to tell villagers who were busy for preparation for the nationwide march and farming, we visiting the Netgiriso with Ms. Kang Mi-Kyung (a spiritual meditation leader) and friends in the world and hung Joan’s scarf, bowed under her lead, toward four directions of east, west, south and north and prayed for peace. Please understand a late post.
Even though invisible, we don’t forget that there are always grateful people in the world who always greatly support us.
Gangjeong sea is literally at the state of disturbances and war. . . in addition with the sounds of engines of 6 barges (from the photo essay of Cho Sung-bong. For more photos, click here)
From the photo essay of Cho Sung-bong.
They are destroying Gangjeong sea insanely ahead of the full scale sea destruction work. . . as if evacuating the front village just before war. . .Gangjeong sea is moaning by a number of dredging ships and excavators. At the front gate, activists are struggling. (Post by Bae Kee-chol)
Gangjeong Sea suffering by naval base construction(destruction)
A, F, G: Planned areas for a new airport that the Jeju Island has made public (* It is told that it was around 1997 that those were mentioned as the planned airports). One of them will have a high possibility to have an air force base along with a new airport.
B: Alttre Air field, Moseulpo. The ROK air force has wanted to use it as the base for the South zone search and rescue corps unit. Very close to Daejeong eup, the planned area for a new air field
C. In case the Jeju Marine Corps are established, field artillery and armored forces might enter. In the Hwasoon port, there is a coast guard-only dock and caissons are being made. The caissons are used for the building of the Jeju naval base project in the Gangjeong village.
D. Gangjoeng village where the Jeju naval base project is being enforced.
E. Seogwipo City. Even now, the Marine Corps’ warships are being moored. If the Jeju marine corps unit is established, headquarter might enter, too,
On Oct. 18, the issue raised in the National Assembly inspection on the ROK air force was on the ‘South zone search and rescue corps’ that is being discussed to be installed in the old but currently unused Alttre air field, Moseulpo.
Kim Jae-Yoon, Democratic United Party, a member of the Defense Committee of the National assembly claimed that it is a tactic ultimately to build an air force base. He claimed that the Jeju, Island of peace is at the risk to be degraded as the ‘Island of military base.’
Saying that “when I demanded the air force on the material on the ‘South zone rescue and search corps unit, the air force replied me that it is planning a creation of it for national security and people’s safety,” Kim interpreted that “However, given that rescue and search corps unit is a non-combat corps that is in charge of search and rescue, its words that it creates it for the securing of national security connote that the rescue and search corps unit is, after all, a combat corps.”
He pointed out that “the South Zone Rescue and Search Unit is roundabout tactic to prepare for the bridgehead for an air force base. It is like the Jeju naval base has been faked as the civilian-military complex for tour beauty.”
It is told that Sung Il-Hwan, the Chief of the General Staff of the Air Force replied him that “Currently, there is no plan to build the air force base.’ Regarding the location for the South Zone Search and Rescue Corps, he stated that “Since the location has not clearly been decided, we plan to arrange it connected to the Jeju new air port, if it is built.”
Kim’s claim is not new but has constantly been raised by many observers. According to Ohmynews on Sept. 3, 2012, Roh Hoe-Chan, Progressive United Party, has made a remarkable claim in the National Assembly inspection session in May 2007, that “the Ministry of National Defense and Jeju Island have agreed that the Island provides 300,000 pyeong (about 99 ha) to an air force in case the 2nd new air port is built on the condition that the air force concedes the Island old Alttre air field of about 600,000 pyeong (about 198 ha). It meant the Air Force is ready to use the Alttre Air field as an area for the South zone search and rescue corps unit unless the Jeju provides an alternative area to the Air force. (* For reference the Jeju naval base project is of about 48 ha.)
The Alttre airfield (1.2 km runway), constructed during the Japanese imperialism is currently unused. But it used to be utilized for the Japanese attack to Nanjing, China, 700 km away, during Chinese-Japanese war in 1937 and is currently owned by the Ministry of National Defense. See here.
It is not only an Alttre Air Field. According to Ohmynews, there is a concern that the Hwasooon area and Seogwipo in the both sides of Gangjeong might be utilized as military fortress as well. It is because the navy plans to reorganize the Jeju Defense headquarter to the Jeju Marine corps (brigade level) in 2015. The Ministry of National Defense has issued the Basic Plan of Defense Reform (2012~2030) on Aug. 29, 2012.
Since Roh Moo Hyun, ex-President declared the Jeju, as the peace Island on Jan. 27, 2005, the Alttre Air Filed has been mentioned for the Jeju Peace Park. But there has been only a small progress on it because of the demand mentioned above by the MND.
Realization of the Jeju, as true Peace Island is ongoing supreme task for the people.
‘Speaking at a Pentagon news briefing last June, Pacific Command commander Admiral Samuel J. Locklear said: “We’re not really interested in building any more U.S. bases in the Asia-Pacific.” “We shouldn’t have to at this point in time. We have reliable partners and reliable allies, and together we should be able to find ways to—not only bilaterally, but in some cases to multilaterally—to be able to find these locations where we can put security forces that respond to a broad range of security issues.”
Translation: The U.S. is having the South Korean government build the Navy base on Jeju Island for us. A couple nights ago I was watching the local Congressional debate on TV and our Maine Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (Democrat) was asked where we can cut the federal budget. Her answer was that we can cut back on some of the money we spend on foreign bases by getting our allies to build them for us. She didn’t say we shouldn’t have or use the bases for our military empire. This “liberal” instead said we should get others to pay the costs for us.
In the meantime the dredging of the ocean, just offshore from Gangjeong village continues. The protests at the Navy base destruction gates continue as well.’
A Japanese peace activist has been denied entry at the Gimpo Airport, Seoul, on Oct. 16 when he was to visit his sick friend. Mr. Koto Shoji has visited Gangjeong last year and has written an article on it in the magazine named “Power of People’ (Informed by Ms. Lee Kil-Joo)
With his forcefully denied entry, the total numbers of people who have been denied entry, related to the Jeju naval base project have become at least 20. 3 of them have been repeatedly denied entries.
You can see the summary report on the unjust entry denial against internationals as of Oct. 3, here.
‘Wright, who resigned in protest of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, points to the South Korean naval base on Jeju which, when finished, will house AEGIS-equipped destroyers linked to U.S. missile defense as an example of how the United States pressures its allies to follow certain paths.
Speaking at a Pentagon news briefing last June, PACOM commander Admiral Samuel J. Locklear basically said the same thing: “We’re not really interested in building any more U.S. bases in the Asia-Pacific,” he said. “We shouldn’t have to at this point in time. We have reliable partners and reliable allies, and together we should be able to find ways to—not only bilaterally, but in some cases to multilaterally—to be able to find these locations where we can put security forces that respond to a broad range of security issues.”
Fresh from hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Honolulu last autumn, U.S. President Barack Obama recently told members of the Australian Parliament that America’s defense posture across the Asia-Pacific would be “more broadly distributed…more flexible—with new capabilities to ensure that our forces can operate freely.”
The announcement of America’s “Asia-Pacific pivot” by its first Hawaiia-born president was highly fitting, since the Hawaiian Islands are at the piko (“navel” in Hawaiian) of this vast region.
A less flattering metaphor for Hawaii’s role in the Pacific is what Maui educator and native Hawaiian activist Kaleikoa Kaeo has called a giant octopus whose tentacles reach across the ocean clutching Japan, Okinawa, South Korea, Jeju island, Guam—and, at times, the Philippines, American Samoa, Wake Island, Bikini Atoll, and Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.
The head of this beast is in Hawaii, which is home to U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), with sonar, radar, and optical tracking stations as its eyes and ears. Its brain consists of the supercomputers on Maui and the command center on Oahu that connects PACOM to distant bases. This octopus excretes waste as toxic land, polluted waters, abandoned poisons, blown-up and sunken ships, and depleted uranium (DU). Like a real octopus that can regenerate severed limbs, the military in the Pacific grows in new locations (Thailand, Australia) and returns to old ones (Philippines, Vietnam).
PACOM headquarters at Camp H.M. Smith on Oahu is a short drive from Waikiki Beach, but it’s unlikely many tourists pause to consider that tensions between the United States and Russia over missile defense, the war in Afghanistan, the destruction of Iraq, the use of drones in Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and the Philippines—as well as growing opposition to military bases in Okinawa, Guam and Jeju—are all linked to Hawaii.
Thirty-six nations— and over half the world’s population—live in PACOM’s “Area of Responsibility” which spans from the Bering Strait to New Zealand, as far west as Pakistan and Siberia and east to the Galapagos. This behemoth’s self-proclaimed duty is to defend “the territory of the United States, its people, and its interests,” and to “enhance stability in the Asia-Pacific,” “promote security cooperation, encourage peaceful development, respond to contingencies, deter aggression and, when necessary, fight to win.”
Sovereignty violated
Hawaii’s relationship with the U.S. military was cemented on January 16, 1893, when U.S. Marines overthrew what had been a sovereign kingdom recognized by the United States and dozens of countries around the world. Encouraged by Anglo-American subjects of the Hawaiian kingdom seeking tariff-free access to American markets for their sugar cane, the U.S. military—pursuing what was then already a mission of expansion in the Pacific—toppled Queen Liliuokalani, making way for the 1898 U.S. declaration of the Territory of Hawaii and, in 1959, statehood.
In 1900, President Theodore Roosevelt said, “I wish to see the United States the dominant power on the shores of the Pacific Ocean.” He and every president since have understood the importance of Hawaii in fulfilling that goal. “Our future history will be more determined by our position on the Pacific facing China than by our position on the Atlantic facing Europe,” Roosevelt said.
Since even before World War II, but especially since the 1947 establishment of PACOM, Hawaii has been at the center of testing, training, and deployment of U.S. military hardware and personnel around the region. Today Hawaii is home to118 military sites, from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai to Kaena Point Satellite Tracking Station on Oahu, from the Air Force Maui Optical and Supercomputing observatory to the Pohakuloa Training Area on the Big Island (Hawaii Island).
Besides Hawaii’s four largest islands, the military has used smaller Hawaiian islands and offshore islets for live-fire testing for decades. Best known isKahoolawe, which was a bombing range from 1941 until 1990 when, after more than a dozen years of protests and legal challenges, President George H.W. Bush ordered a cessation to bombing and the removal of unexploded ordnances. Yet as of 2004, one-quarter of Kahoolawe still had unexploded ordnances and was considered “unsafe.”
On Hawaii Island, at 133,000 acres, Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) is over four times the size of Kahoolawe. The high-altitude site between the volcanoes Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea has been used by all branches of the military for small arms training, mortar firing, and other live-fire tests.
In addition to being shelled with millions of rounds of ammunition annually—and on the receiving end of 2,000-pound inert bombs dropped from B-2 bombers—PTA is contaminated with an undetermined amount of depleted uranium (DU). In 2008, the Hawaii County Council voted 8-1 for a resolution calling for a halt to live-fire training until further assessments and clean-up can be conducted. The military, however, continues to exploit the site, according to Jim Albertini with the Malu Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action.
Below PTA, in the sleepy town of Hilo, community advocate Lori Buchanan describes Pohakuloa today: “It’s so disheartening to drive past and see the degradation to the land. What I see will bring tears to your eyes—not only animals with no place to go, but dust storms reminiscent of Kahoolawe because of the erosion and impact of military training.” She says the bombing doesn’t make sense. “Why would you bomb the hell out of the land when it’s so limited? We live on an island…and they’re bombing a huge area, making it a wasteland.”
Although a native Hawaiian, Buchanan says she isn’t instinctively anti-military. “It’s the whole patriotic [thing]. It’s ingrained in us. We understand the importance of defense—no one is challenging that, but is all this really necessary? You cannot kill your own resources when you live on an island and have nowhere to go once you’ve killed everything off.”
“It isn’t just Pohakuloa. It’s Kahoolawe, Makua, Barking Sands, the proposed training on Maui and it’s Kalaupapa,” says Buchanan, talking about Kalaupapa peninsula, on the island of Molokai. Kalaupapa is a quiet place, best known for its 19th-century leprosy colony at the bottom of Hawaii’s highest sea cliffs. Less well known is that Kalaupapa and “topside” (upper) Molokai are used by the Navy for confined area and field carrier landing “touch-and-go” training by CH-53Dhelicopters, the type used in Afghanistan. In July 2012, activists on Molokai helped thwart plans to increase night training exercises for the controversial MV-22 Osprey and Huey attack helicopters from 112 takeoff and landings per year to 1,388.
The Navy plans to base two squadrons (12 aircraft each) of Osprey and one squadron of light attack H-1 Cobra and Huey attack helicopters in Hawaii. The Osprey, which takes off like a helicopter but can fly like an airplane, has been heavily criticized over safety concerns following at least seven fatal crashes—including two this year, in Florida and Morocco. Osprey helicopters have been used in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, and they’re being deployed in Japan and Okinawa despite fervent protests.
In addition to concerns about some 2,000 new active-duty personnel and their dependents being transferred to Oahu, civic and cultural groups are worried about the impacts of the aircraft on local communities, wildlife, and historically and culturally sensitive areas on Kalaupapa, which is designated a U.S. National Historic Park. The military has said the increased training will have “no significant impact on noise levels for most communities,” but local groups wedged between high cliffs, mountains, and the sea fear otherwise.
Under my thumb
An Asia-Pacific pivot will increase testing and training beyond what has taken place in Hawaii for years—from live-fire testing in Makua Valley on Oahu to missile defense, rocket, and drone testing at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai. Additionally, every two years, the U.S. military holds its Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) training—the “world’s largest international maritime exercise,” which was most recently held this summer across the islands.
RIMPAC 2012 included 22 regional allies (including Canada, Japan, Australia, South Korea) and more distant nations like Colombia, Netherlands, Tonga, India, and Russia. Notably absent was China, but in September 2012, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that Beijing would be invited to participate in a limited capacity in the 2014 exercise.
Retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright sees RIMPAC and the growing number of multi-national joint military “exercises and engagements” in the region as an opportunity for the United States to test (and show off) its next generation of weaponry: laser-fueled, computerized, and submarine-launched drones. It’s also a chance to closely assess regional capabilities while positioning the United States to more effectively “push around” other countries and persuade them to do the foreign policy and military operational bidding of the United States, Wright says.
Wright, who resigned in protest of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, points to the South Korean naval base on Jeju which, when finished, will house AEGIS-equipped destroyers linked to U.S. missile defense as an example of how the United States pressures its allies to follow certain paths.
Speaking at a Pentagon news briefing last June, PACOM commander Admiral Samuel J. Locklear basically said the same thing: “We’re not really interested in building any more U.S. bases in the Asia-Pacific,” he said. “We shouldn’t have to at this point in time. We have reliable partners and reliable allies, and together we should be able to find ways to—not only bilaterally, but in some cases to multilaterally—to be able to find these locations where we can put security forces that respond to a broad range of security issues.”
“It’s complicated”
Much has been made of the Asia-Pacific pivot, but Oahu activist Kyle Kajihiro ofHawaii Peace & Justice says this is just the most recent wave in a series of endless waves.
“Every pivot needs a fulcrum in order to turn. Hawaii was the first fulcrum for U.S. in the Pacific and has allowed it to leverage their power to greater effect,” he says. Kajihiro points out that questions of land use and the military’s social, cultural, and environmental impacts on Hawaii are frequently overlooked or sidelined by the notion that seemingly endless infusions of money and military-based employment always trump the needs of people and the environment.
For decades the military has enjoyed solid backing from Hawaii’s congressional delegation in Washington, the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce, and unions with construction interests. Hawaii’s own population, which overwhelmingly votes Democratic, has largely accepted what Kajihiro calls “the dominant myth” that a large military presence is organic, inevitable, and naturally beneficial. He refers to events like “Military Appreciation” month and the USS Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor, where he says militarism and war are monumentalized as forms of “redemptive violence”—that is, as a source of goodness, honor, and valor from which the United States always emerges “stronger and better.”
In Hawaii, the military has widespread local support, even from some native Hawaiians (whose kingdom was overthrown), people of Japanese descent (who have suffered discrimination and internment) and others whose ancestral homelands have born the brunt of the U.S. military (Koreans, Okinawans, Chamorro, Pacific Islanders).
“When you’re severely addicted to something like the military,” asks Kajihiro, “how do you transition away without causing trauma?” He says Hawaii would face serious economic hemorrhaging if it turned away from the military cold turkey. “How do we plan for and invest in an alternate course that will take us off an addictive substance that deteriorates the body to a more diversified, healthy economic sustenance?”
Hawaii is a remote archipelago almost wholly dependent on imported oil, commodities and manufactured goods, but increasingly its people are recognizing the need to become more self-reliant, especially in terms of local food production.
In the last decade Hawaii has seen a mushrooming of businesses and educational efforts to pursue alternative energy based on sun, wind, waves and waste. Author Richard Heinberg, a senior fellow in residence at the Post Carbon Institute, has suggested Hawaii should move in a direction like New Zealand, which places very little emphasis on military strength but has become a global leader in environmental conservation.
Under the banner of an “Asia-Pacific pivot,” the United States is positioning its military to secure access to remaining resources and drive the economic and political winds of the region, but it also demonstrates that it understands the importance of finding alternatives to building large, new bases that rely on increasingly hard-to-obtain money and oil.
In order to successfully secure a place for its people in a more crowded, resource-strained world, Hawaii would do well to pursue its own pivot away from militarism and instead shift its efforts to food and energy self-reliance, environmental protection, and planning for survival in a world beset by climate change.
The sooner Hawaii recognizes that it would be better off with a drastically reduced dependency on the military, the sooner it can begin to move toward a healthier, safer, and more secure future.
In the National Assembly Inspection on the navy headquarter on Oct. 18, Kim Jae-Yoon (Democratic United Party, Seogwipo City), member of the Defense Committee of the National Assembly raised primarily on two issues. While the 1st issue has been constantly raised by many observers, the 2nd is something new and important. Anyway, here is the summary based on the Jeju Domin Ilbo, Oct. 18.
1. Regarding the harbor and bay layout of the Jeju naval base:
‘If simulation verification on the control of 150,000 ton cruise is not correctly carried out, all the budgets related to the Jeju naval base project for next year should be cut.’
Kim pointed out that:
(1) Because of the reduced size of turning basin, cruise navigation is dangerous.
(2) Because of sea route change, dredging at the bottom of sea is inevitable, which raises concern on the intrusion on the ecology system protection area.
(3) Because of arbitrary standard on wave height, there is the risk of accidents during ships’ mooring or unloading.
(4) Because of no design on emergency exit that should be prepared, according to the layout standard on the defense/ military facilities, for the cases when vessel is being attacked or running aground so the port entry is blockaded, it is difficult for vessels to move out if emergency occurs.
He claimed that:
Even though the flaws on the harbor and bay layout of the Jeju Civilian-Military Complex for Tour Beauty (* In fact, a pure military base) are very serious, the navy has attempted to hide those with false explanations. It should be verified through objective and fair simulation whether turning basin and sea route have been designed according to the legal standard and the base plan is appropriate. The Government should accept the simulation cases demanded by the Jeju Island government (* which, itself, does not trust simulations by the central government but constantly makes false propaganda on the dual complex port). And the whole budget on the naval base project should be cut for the next year, unless simulation verification, the core of 5 items recommended to the Government by the National assembly is properly carried out.
2. Regarding the government assertion on sea security
‘The base would take little role in the protection on the southern sea area and maritime traffic route. The navy cause of [so-called ‘security’] for building the naval base is only appearance.’
Kim pointed out that:
While the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone( KADIZ) is set close to the Jeju island, the Japanese Air Defense Identification Zone (JADIZ) is set below the south sea of the Jeju and the Ieodo (* a submerged rock, not the Island) in the south of the Marado(the southernmost Island in Korea) also belongs to the JADIZ.
Therefore in case the ROK navy mooring in the Jeju naval base and patrolling in the southern sea area of the Jeju, carries out operations with helicopters or aircraft embarked on vessels within the ADIZ, it should make a prior consultation with Japan and its activities could be limited by the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force(JMSDF).
Therefore Kim emphasized that:
‘Even though the navy asserts on the expansion of its influential power in the southern sea area through the building of the Jeju naval base, in reality, it is questionable to which points it can assert on its operation scope in the southern sea area. Then the role of the naval base as an outpost that guards the southern sea area is very limited. The cause to enforce the base project with tremendous budget and social costs then goes down.’
The motto “We are the Sky” comes from the motto of the Sky Act, a joint solidarity campaign of three struggles in Korea: (S)Ssang Yong autoworkers layoff struggle, (K)Gureombi Rock/anti-Gangjeong naval base struggle, and the (Y)Yongsan Tradegy struggle.
Navy report: Jeju naval base to accommodate US nuclear submarine
Recently acquired documents raise questions about Gangjeong Village as a joint civil-military harbor
By Ha Eo-young, staff reporter
A Navy report from 2009 states that the water depth for a naval base currently under construction on Jeju Island was designed to accommodate a US nuclear submarine.
This latest revelation comes on the heels of allegations that the base was designed to allow a US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to make port.
Document 06-520, titled “Basic Plan and Examination Request Basic Plan Report” was acquired from naval headquarters by Democratic United Party lawmaker Kim Kwang-jin. It states in its harbor facility requirement standards section that the “overall depth of the submarine dock was set at 12 meters at the request of the orderer.”
This design depth suggests the base was planned to accommodate the US nuclear-powered SSN-776 submarine, since a depth of 9.3 meters would be adequate for South Korean submarines. This means that the base was designed around a vessel that the South Korean Navy does not current possess, and has no plans to possess.
“The Ministry of National Defense said there were no demands from CNFK [the Commander of US Naval Forces Korea], but from this design it appears that the South Korean government took it upon itself to make [the harbor] big enough for a US warship that might never dock there, without even being asked to,” said Kim.
“If it is built this way, we can’t even guarantee that it will be a South Korean military base, let alone a civil harbor,” he added. The South Korean government previously said the base was being designed as a joint civil-military harbor.
“Suppose the US military comes to Jeju with a nuclear-power aircraft carrier,” Kim continued. “How can we reasonably guarantee that civilians can freely use it for ‘tourism’?”
This is not the first accusation that the Jeju base is being built to US military standards. Previously, observers pointed to phrasing about “water depth meeting the 15.2 m standards of CFNK” in facility construction specifications published by naval headquarters in 2010 as evidence that the base was being tailored to CFNK demands.
“The report was a pamphlet based on documents submitted by the company that performed the study,” said a Navy official. “The client in it is obviously the Navy.”
“The design is a preemptive step to allow all submarines above a certain size to make port, not just a US nuclear-powered submarine,” the official added.
Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]
……………………………………………………………………………….
# Save Jeju Now adds….
Mr. Go Gwon-Il, chairman of the villagers’ Committee to Stop the Naval Base has done in-depth research about the issue on the submarines that may moor in the Jeju naval base. According to him, it is possible to station total 80 trident nuclear missiles in the coast, which is enough number to annihilate China.
According to his research, it is possible that total 4 submarines, including maximum two nuclear-propelled submarines that loads 24 numbers of 8,000km range nuclear missiles each and two nuclear submarines each that loads 16 nuclear missiles, and more than two multipurpose attack type submarines can be moored and equipped.
In detail,
The length of the submarine dock, 365m is enough for the simultaneous mooring of the US nuclear submarines of the Ohio(the biggest) and George Washington class loaded with ballistic missiles.
The dock for the mid-size ship/ submarine is for a combination of diverse US nuclear submarines. Submarines of attack type or ballistic missile submarines can be moored.
Among the US nuclear submarines, the submarine with the deepest draft is the Sea Wolf class, which is multipurpose attack ship and draft is 10.66m. That is why the water depth of 12m has been demanded for the submarine dock, by the Commander, US Navy Forces of Korea (CNFK).
Gangjeong and the Naval Base Issue stir up the IUCN’s WCC 2012, New U.S. Links to the Naval Base found, ROK Government ignores the UN on Gangjeong, Interviews with Prisoner Kim Bok-Chul and a WCC participant, Articles from several Veterans for Peace visitors to Gangjeong, and more!